克尔凯郭尔论信仰的实践理由与认识理由之间的关系

IF 0.7 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Z Quanbeck
{"title":"克尔凯郭尔论信仰的实践理由与认识理由之间的关系","authors":"Z Quanbeck","doi":"10.1111/papq.12456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On the dominant contemporary accounts of how practical considerations affect what we ought to believe, practical considerations either <i>encroach</i> on epistemic rationality by affecting whether a belief is epistemically justified, or constitute distinctively practical reasons for belief which can only affect what we ought to believe by <i>conflicting</i> with epistemic rationality. This paper argues that Søren Kierkegaard offers a promising alternative view on which practical considerations can affect what we ought to believe without either encroaching on or (necessarily) conflicting with epistemic rationality by determining which among the epistemically permitted outright doxastic attitudes one should all-things-considered adopt.","PeriodicalId":47097,"journal":{"name":"PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"120 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kierkegaard on the Relationship Between Practical and Epistemic Reasons for Belief\",\"authors\":\"Z Quanbeck\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/papq.12456\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"On the dominant contemporary accounts of how practical considerations affect what we ought to believe, practical considerations either <i>encroach</i> on epistemic rationality by affecting whether a belief is epistemically justified, or constitute distinctively practical reasons for belief which can only affect what we ought to believe by <i>conflicting</i> with epistemic rationality. This paper argues that Søren Kierkegaard offers a promising alternative view on which practical considerations can affect what we ought to believe without either encroaching on or (necessarily) conflicting with epistemic rationality by determining which among the epistemically permitted outright doxastic attitudes one should all-things-considered adopt.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY\",\"volume\":\"120 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12456\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12456","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在当代关于实践因素如何影响我们应该相信什么的主流观点中,实践因素要么通过影响一个信念在认识论上是否合理而侵犯了认识论理性,要么构成了独特的实践性信念理由,而这些理由只能通过与认识论理性相冲突来影响我们应该相信什么。本文认为,索伦-克尔凯郭尔(Søren Kierkegaard)提供了另一种很有前途的观点,即实践因素可以影响我们应该相信什么,而不会侵犯认识论理性或(必然)与认识论理性相冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Kierkegaard on the Relationship Between Practical and Epistemic Reasons for Belief
On the dominant contemporary accounts of how practical considerations affect what we ought to believe, practical considerations either encroach on epistemic rationality by affecting whether a belief is epistemically justified, or constitute distinctively practical reasons for belief which can only affect what we ought to believe by conflicting with epistemic rationality. This paper argues that Søren Kierkegaard offers a promising alternative view on which practical considerations can affect what we ought to believe without either encroaching on or (necessarily) conflicting with epistemic rationality by determining which among the epistemically permitted outright doxastic attitudes one should all-things-considered adopt.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Pacific Philosophical Quarterly is a journal of general philosophy in the analytic tradition, publishing original articles from all areas of philosophy including metaphysics, epistemology, moral philosophy, political philosophy, philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, aesthetics and history of philosophy. Periodically, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly publishes special editions devoted to the investigation of important topics in a particular field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信